I am extremely interested in using the computer (Mac or PC) as a source for a digital playback. It seems to be the right direction for modern digital playback, a good alternative to the age old CDP, has endless potential and most convenient. So, I got an EMM DAC2 (retail $10000) with USB input and connected it to an Windows laptop via USB. My preamp, amp, speakers and cables are also of very good quality. Played some track on my system from the PC (used Audacity software, a very good and high quality software for sound processing). In 2 minutes I had to turn it off. It is just mediocre sound compared to playing the same track through a $1000 CDP(Sony SCD XA5400ES). It is almost like listening to an internet-radio through my PC speakers. I was wondering what happened to my first rate sound system ? Later I replaced the Windows PC with a Linux based MacMini, hoping that I will get the result I wanted. But it did not improve much. I did not like the outcome. My listening experience with the computer set up was 4 minutes(2 with PC and 2 with Mac) total. Since then I have gone back to using the same old CDP. I think I blame on the USB interface for this failure. The USB interface has not come up to the state of the art of a modern CD player. I did not try other interfaces purposely. No High-Res, only 16bit/44.1 audio files. I dont listen to SACD. Fire Wire to USB, USB to SPDI/F, Fire wire to HDMI, Firewire to SPDI/F, and almost an infinite combinations of patch up ideas are out there. But I dont like a patch up solution nor do I like to compromise the sound in favor of convenience.
I have heard many audiophile friends changed to computer based playback system many years ago for good and they are happy too. But I am not convinced yet. I am eagerly waiting for computer audio to catch up. I am sure it is in the making but it still has to go quiet a long distance.
My issues with EAC were not sonic; I ripped a few hundred CD's and EAC didn't do as well as job with the meta data that I wanted. I re-ripped with dbPower and am thrilled, and am not looking back. EAC consistently missed a few tracks in the ripping process as well. Of course it could have been something in my PC, natch, but for $29 bucks, the headache is gone and I'm a ripping phool again.
I have EAC and DBpoweramp both. I find DBpoweramp a bit more user friendly, but as far as dropping disc to the hard drive or minor conversion, I really can't say one is better than the other.... but my EAC doesn't wear pants. I had tried numerous settings with foobar, jriver, dbpower amp and EAC. When all are configured properly and the free ware is kept up to date, I find them comparable in sound quality.
Computer audio can(and does) sound awesome. I think dbpoweramp beats the pants off of EAC, in my set up.
I just did a ridiculous overhaul on my windows system (a very sophisticated cleaning & tweaking) and found a ton of malware issues (I do run antimalware-long story) and once the cleaning/tweaking over, the PC rig sounds even better than it was. PC Audio has many facets - the OS being bombarded with malware being one of them, I have now learned.
been doing "hi res" since late 2009. in one respect....it's just like any other format. when done wrong(recording and/or gear)....it sounds bad. however...i would challenge skeptics to give it a listen when it's done right. it can sound truly amazing.
Thanks Dtc. Still no industry standard --- sad. I hope the techies figure it out before I get so old I lose my hearing. LOL Until then, I'm holding with redbook CD.
Bifwynne - the Sony product discussed is basically a CD/SACD player that uses computer files rather than disks. It works with standard CD computer files (16bit/44.1 KHz) as well as higher rez files like 24 bit/96 KH, 24/192KHz like DVD audio used. It also reads SACD files (DSD - 1bit/2.8MHz) and double resolution DSD (1 bit/5.6KHz) files. DSD format is becoming increasingly popular with the hi rez crowd, although there is little currently available in that format. The unit will convert LCPM (like CD, 24/96) to DSD. Some people think the converted DSD sounds better. HI rez LCPM files have become pretty common, but DSD files have not been, partially because it has always been very hard to rip SACDs and because DSD DACs are just becoming available.
In PC audio terms, it performs the tasks of a PC, a PC player (like iTunes, foobar, J River) and a LCPM/DSD DAC.
It might be a good solution for a novice hi rez person, if there is such a thing. For current computer audiophiles, my guess is they will stay with the flexibility of different software players, different DACs, different OSs, etc. You can do the same functions as the new Sony with, as an example, a Windows PC, J River Media Center software and a Mytek DAC. Some people will find the integrated unit useful. The Mytek DAC is $1,800 if I remember correctly, so the $2K price is in line.
Donjr just posted a thread that mentions Sony is introducing a bunch of new hi rez products. Admittedly, I do not understand the lingo or the formats. Perhaps one of our digital techy members can translate what this means. Is this something new, or is the digital landscape still pretty rocky? Thanks
The alternative to usb is a good sound card. If you study the USB porotcal, you will find that it transmits data in packets - not streams. That is the inherent problem. No one on earth can dispute that the usb bus teransmits data in packets. A soundcard, via spdif (or PC via fire wire even) transmits data is a stream. USB IS JITTER! (why would you build a house on sand when you can build it on something firm?)
As for examples of listeners abandaning usb, I follow many forums online and if you pick thrugh to the engineers (take a peak at linkedin - places where guys arent trying to sell stuff) you will see what I mean.
It serves no advantage to me to preach against usb other than to save someone out there time and money and not give up on pc audio after a short time cause it sounds poor). Its just gotten silly. Just try the spdif out of a computer and w/o fumbling arond with drivers, clocks, asychronwastemytinestuff, it will just sound awesome.
Steve N: you are correct. the number of "samples" i've heard are limited to say the least. i'll also agree that a few PSA users are completely happy using USB. i'm not disputing USB can sound great. my problem is with all the flaming hoops one must jump through to achieve good USB sound. you've done a great job of explaining how important proper implementation is when using USB.....your many posts on the subject explain it thoroughly. my problem lies with the "proper implementation" itself.....and the cost (money and complexity)/reward proposition. i obviously don't get it.
that being said....i'll go back to my original statement... that USB is not needed to achieve great sound. it could be for some??.....it might be for other....but it's not always the case
>>The guys that have been running USB servers for a while now are going back to CD players. To me, that is abandoning USB.
Cerrot, who are "the guys"? And are you certain that ALL of "the guys" abandoning USB servers for CD players, or is your allegorical statement in reference to something you heard regarding a friend of your cousin's dog groomer?
Topmostaudio, it is a safe bet that PC audio is here to stay, at least until something newer or better comes along. Industry and media surveys show that CD player use is diminishing across the board, but less so with the over 55 crowd. Most folks under 30 probably don't even have a CD player anymore, except for a laptop and even that hardware is diminishing rapidly.
PC audio (I include mac in that description as well) can sound very good, as good or better than almost any standalone CD player or transport. I used a Meridian 508.24 for years, and still have it. My mac audio setup sounds better, is more convenient (once setup) and is much more versatile.
What's the downside to PC audio? First, in short, it's a semi-compatible collection of third party parts and software. It's not as elegant or simple as a CD player, hence all the attempts to make a good, easy-to-use media player. I remember an A'gon member writing, years ago "I won't use computer audio until it is a simple as my [whatever] CD player. All I need is play, pause, FF and FB"
Secondly, PC audio can be expensive, especially if you listen to many of the so-called "experts" who insist that you need a USB/SPDIF bridge, or an external USB reclocker, or an uber-expensive Elbonian DAC w/ seventeen balanced inputs or other such audio frippery. You don't. Start small and simple, get used to managing your music files, and make upgrades as the sound dictates and your budget allows.
IMO, USB works well between PC/mac and DAC, but I have heard many great systems that used SPDIF or TOSLINK. If you have a PC or mac, order a Meridian Explorer DAC from audioadvisor.com. If you have a mac, download a copy of Bitperfect and play your files through iTunes. This is not an expensive suggestion, and many guys here may urge you to spend more. But try this first. If you don't like it, return the Meridian DAC to Audioadvisor and all you are out is shipping and $10 for Bitperfect. But I will bet that you will find it easy to setup, use and that it sounds pretty damned good.
What are they supposed to use instead of USB? Cerrot, you've been banging the USB sucks drum for a long time here, but you're pretty much the only one. Saying USB wasn't designed for audio strikes me as like saying it wasn't designed to transfer documents with a lot of graphics in them. It's ample bandwidth for audio. What's the problem?
The guys that have been running usb servers for a while now are going back to CD players.
I know of nobody who has done that. It can be tempting to proclaim a trend based on a few anecdotal observations. I've certainly been guilty of that, as I think you may be in this case.
Cerrot, You make a good observation. Ultimately people will migrate back to what sounds best to them. At some point in time reality will overtake hype. Charles,
Drubin - guys getting into PC audio are using USB as they don't know any better. Lots of misinformation and companys trying to make a sale. I think anyone who truly understands computers, busses, etc can easilly understand why USB is not proper for audio. The guys that have been running usb servers for a while now are going back to CD players. To me, that is abandoning USB.
Levy - this may be your experience with a limited number of USB interfaces, but they vary across the map. I have customers with your PWDII/Bridge/PWT combo and they are still using my USB interface, the Off-Ramp 5 because it is better.
Steve N: i disagree with your statement "If you want to not only beat, but exceed the performance of the very best CD transports/players, you will need to use USB.
my PWDII/Bridge/PWT has "exceeded" every USB set-up i've heard to date. and i'm not talking bargain basement USB setups. i do stream alot...but have a WES610N pulling in the stream and wiring it to my gear. works beautifully and sounds fantastic. jitter is not an issue for everyone....if you have the right gear.
you don't "need USB" to get outstanding sound. there are alternatives.
no...i'm not an engineer or anything even close. i do know a thing or two about what sounds good.....and it doesn't all revolve around USB (like you make it sound sometimes).
Vegas - The analog section of the DAC is very important to achieving balance, dynamics and an analog quality. Detail, imaging and slam are mostly a result of lowering jitter in the digital sections.
Important analog aspects are:
1) output drive current capability - output impedance and linearity with dynamics 2) I/V conversion linearity 3) gain stage(s) 3) volume control technology, if included
All of these 4 can be compromised, resulting in compression, low S/N ratio and anemic dynamics. This usually occurs with Op-amps, slow-reacting power subsystems and poor volume control technologies.
The best course is to avoid op-amp outputs IME. Also, try to eliminate the preamp altogether or replace it with a transformer passive linestage.
In order to achieve the best system S/N ratio, it is optimum to make the signal as large as possible early in the chain, as in the first stage after the I/V conversion or the I/V stage itself.
The puter is definitely susceptable to noise but it is much easier to deal with than the USB interface's susceptablity to crappy sound, jitter, and the rest. I added a nice power cord, richard grey power conditioner, shatki stone on top of the case and nice isolation feet. the puter has silent fans (for now) and is in the next room. It sounds awesome (but not as good as a VERY good CD payer into the same dac). I have heard the Ayer USB converter and th Berkeley and neither (to my ears) sound anywhere as good as the soundcard. I plan on building a caps server as well, but it will have a sound card. There truly is no practical explanation as to why you would not use a sound card, or at least try it first. Considerig the soundcardis $150 and the usb converter is $2,500, why not just try the sound card?
I have the ESI Julie@ soundcard; didnt hear the asus - I never heard of isolation being a benefit to USB; if anything, the 'isolation' creates its inherent problems.
USB was created to hook up peripherials, not to play muic.
08-24-13: Cerrot I think anything other than an spdif out via a sound card is a LARGE reduction in sound quality. Why would we go through the abomination of converting a usb signal into high end audio when you can have sound card doing it natively?
I am going through this mental debate right now as I plan my CAPS server build. My practical side says why not just get the ASUS Xonar soundcard and use its SPDIF straight into my DAC instead of having to get USB converter in between. As Doggiehowser has pointed out there appears to be come benefit to using the USB then a converter to get rid of noise, jitter, etc. That being said, I am going to have to try out both ways to see which is better.
Shame, Cerrot. Having the sound card in the computer just means it is susceptible to the EMI/RF noise that is in the computer.
USB provides a form of isolation from that noise.
Other options include what say Aurender has done which compartmentalizes the computer's components noisy sections which work just as well. But then you'd have to customize a completely new computer motherboard, power supply etc. Something few people have resources to do.
The closest you can achieve if you are building a music computer, is something like CAPS, and there're still benefits from USB.
I think anything other than an spdif out via a sound card is a LARGE reduction in sound quality. Why would we go through the abomination of converting a usb signal into high end audio when you can have sound card doing it natively? USB in music is like flying to sweden for a sex change. Why go through such a drastic conversion? (because they can sell it easilly to everyone! - Techno phobes need not be concerned)
Today, I am seeing more and more people abandoning (finally) USB. They gave us usb because it was idiot proof - every puter has one and the user didn't need to open up the box. Well, great things usually take some effort. My dealer actually laughs when we discuss USB as an interface. I laugh as well.
Doggiehowser: To my regeret I did not auditioned EMM Labs DAC2. However, knowing reputatio of the designer you probably cannot go wrong with this choice
Audioeng: Lets not play with words, please. Typical average DAC has PPL i.e. as the rule, it has clock(s).
For music lovers who own DAC with SPDIF inputs only - your and very, very few others USB inteface plays enormously imprtant role - allowing these audiophile to continue to use their DAC and, as you said, frequently improve sound quality over "raw" SPDIF directly from the server. Your device is great, particualrly with its dedicated PSU
Can anybody comment on Lynx HiLo converter with USB input ? Is the USB implementation truely asynchronous ? How is the DAC performance ? How would it compare to a good USB/SPDIF converter + EMM DAC2 ? Thanks,
It takes time to get everything right. You need to optimize the computer OS for audio play. Not all computers sound the same. I have a friend that built 2 computers and one of them sounded awful. So you have software and hardware to get right on just the computer side. You also need a good USB converter they are not all created equal. I can tell you in my opinion and with my hardware Windows Server 2012 sounds amazingly better than optimized Win 7. You should be able to beat the sound of a Sony 5400 as I owned one a couple of years ago.
"Audioengr: the same answer is to you. if DAC is "garbage" (and if it has poor clocks then it is GARBAGE without going any father, don't care about it magic tube output stage or whatever) then no music server, USB Interface etc. help it."
Actually not true. The DAC S/PDIF input will not have ANY clock in the DAC associated with it UNLESS it has a hardware upsampler chip or other PLL to reclock it.
Even with or without the hardware upsampler, a low-jitter USB converter will make a HUGE difference, even with an inexpensive DAC. This USB converter will have a good master clock and drive the DAC using a good S/PDIF coax.
The master clock jitter is more important than the DAC.
Topmostaudio: Inteface Converter, by itself is not revolutionary step. There ara companies which produce them for years under different names e.g. PS Audio, Linn etc and their sound quality vary.
Today, IMO, is much cheaper to produce very high quality music servers utilizing such brilliant processors as Intel "Haswell" i7 where I can sacrifice, say 1% of its power on useless activity and use 99% on music (depending, of course, how well I deal with operating system, high freq grounding noise etc etc).
If I would design similar quality "Inteface Convertot" from the scratch then to get "there" - it will cost you money which, TODAY, you will never pay. This reality forces us, in Musica Pristina, to excell (as best as we can) in music servers where we can match our technology e.g. PSU and off-the-shelf processors like Intel "Haswell"
The maojor question, I, as the end-user in search of turntable or "Interface Converter" or tube preamp ask myself - how it sounds? The particular design philosophy is much less of my concern.
Audioeng: the same answer is to you. if DAC is "garbage" (and if it has poor clocks then it is GARBAGE without going any father, don;t care about it magic tube output stage or whatever) then no music server, USB Interface etc will help it.
Mapman, No, I have not used any network device other than Windows laptop and MacMini. Wifi is an interesting option. At the time I thought the wifi is inferior to wired connection for HQ audio, even though it can isolate the computer noise. Probably I have to revisit this option again. Can anybody suggest me a good network server with wifi to consider ?
Anything other than a really good networked player or good USB interface will be a compromise in SQ.
Other interfaces can be reclocked however, to reduce jitter. The artifacts of upsampling are audible, but not bad given the latest technology in upsampling.
Top, have you considered any networked player type devices? I use Squeezebox Touch currently, which is unfortunately no longer in production, but there are others. I used older technology Roku Soundbridge prior. Both performed similarly well via the same external DAC. Other current similar devices may as well. Wifi connection helps keep stereo and noisy computer isolated. A pretty optimal architecture for computer audio IMHO.
With true asynchronous transmission the DAC is remarkably immune to jitter because a buffer in the DAC controls the flow of the data. The DAC controls the audio transfer from the computer, ignoring the computers USB bus clock and instead slaving the computer to the buffer in the DAC. The DAC requests the packets of audio data from the computer and stores this data in the buffer. The DACs buffer and the digital converter chip itself are then syncd with a single fixed-frequency clock. This method assures a irtually jitter-free transmission.
Hfisher3380, I am not dead set on the USB per se. I will be perfectly happy with an interface from the computer (PC/MAC) which is reliable and gives best audio output without any compromise.
EMM Labs DAC2 USB port was designed almost 5 years ago when computer audio was at its infancy. Its USB port was almost an after though, and only capable of running 44.1kHz or 48kHz only and very likely used a synchronous USB connection (par for the course of that era).
The real beauty of that DAC would not be fully realised with the USB port. You should see a big improvement going to an asynchronous USB-SPDIF device like Wavelink HS, or Berkeley Alpha USB which also support Integer/Direct Mode with AudirvanaPlus on the Mac platform, and hooking the SPDIF to the coax/AES input on the EMM Labs DAC2.
You will find a marked improvement too if you use a dedicated computer that runs without the multiple processes running in the background. You will also find that stuff that improves hifi components (power supplies/vibrations) will also have an effect on your PC audio. There are linear power supplies, Solid State drives (no vibrations) that can be used on modified or custom built PCs/Macs.
That said, I find that spinning a disc still sounds marginally better than computer audio but with the leaps and bounds of computer software and technology, it's much closer today than it ever was.
Spectron wrote: "It could be much cheaper if USB output from a music server will be well designed and well executed, if music server designer would asume that USB DAC input is mediocre and do THE RIGHT JOB on the side of music servers."
I'm afraid not. The master clock is still inside the USB interface in the DAC, not in the server. It's the USB interface in the DAC that matters.
I agree with most here who suggest that your USB interface was the likely culprit. I'm not familiar with the DAC you were using but IME most DACs with multiple input options have a severely compromised USB input. If you are dead-set on USB you should look at a standalone asynchronous USB DAC. This is what I am using at it beats the pants off of my previous CDPs - including SACD/DVDa on more expensive machines. In fact I used to have the very same Sony player you do and my Mac Mini --> DAC is so much better it is laughable.
Another thing to watch out for is to make sure your software player is transmitting a bit perfect signal to the DAC. Itunes alone is a no-go, you need aftermarket add-on software.
I really like the "internet radio through my PC speaker sound that I'm obtaining from my CAT amps and Soundlab M1PX speakers.
Gesh, generalization about interfaces and suppositions about a technology not yet being mature enough, are just that suppositions and generalizations. In my PC audio experience (as well as audio experiences in general), I've found that these 2-words define conclusions that always prevent one from making really wonderful discoveries.
Based on my satisfaction with the present status of computer audio, perhaps I fell into PC Audio trough that contained the only good hardware, but thats simply not the case!
PC audio and the USB interface are as mature as any other high-end audio playback chain e.g., box vs open baffle speakers, planars, horns, active/passive preamps, no preamps, vinyl, M/M vs M/C cartridges etc .. Will advancements be made in each of these audio niches, you betcha. Should one put off buying one of these niches, because theyre not yet mature enough, no.
Years ago I moved from a Wadia 861 CDP to computer audio and haven't missed a thing sonically. My first USB DAC was a Wavelength Brick Silver. My present DAC is a Wavelength Crimson.
In my system, high definition files (96/24 and above) sound extremely close to vinyl which is being spun on a Galibier turntable, Tri-planar tonearm and a Dynavector XV1s cart. So, from that standpoint, my audio buddy's systems and from many of the rooms at 2012's RMAF, great digital audio (and yes, USB derived) can be had with a little effort and not as much gnashing of teeth as some think, or would have you believe.
With an external HD, a Mac mini, PureMusic, and an iPad, Im enjoying the heck out of my setup and 28,000+ tracks redbook and HDs.
From my current and obvious audio standpoint, my past, present and future state-of-the-art audio software is USB PC audio and vinyl.
Simon, I was referring to a computer of some sort with a CPU as in a normal computer, but the computer is designed for audio and thus will be extremely costly yet not usable as a normal computer.
I can see very clearly that with the on set of this so called computer audio, a new type of device called "interface converter" is going to find its importance in the audio system much like a preamp found its position in interconnecting various sources to an audio system previously.
So, the audio chain with a computer will look like the following: Computer => Interface Converter => DAC => Preamp => Amp => Speaker. Previously it was CDP/TT => Preamp => Amp => Speaker. OR Transport => DAC => Preamp => Amp => Speaker
This new component "Interface Converter" will convert various digital Interfaces (I2S/HDMI/USB/FireWire/SPDIF/TOSLINK) => Analog or one form of digital => another form of digital signal.
The quality of this conversion will dictate the quality of the system sound. Better the conversion quality better is the isolation between a mediocre computer HW and a high end audio system.
Topmostaudio: I believe your comparison between regular computer and music server (where you should not be able to run your 3D graphics) is correct.
" It [music server] will be an alternate transport which happen to use some processor and useless outside audio application"
Here I am not sure I unerstand it. Most even household electronics carry some processor so by itself its presence means nothing to me. "Useless" outside audio applications??? ...Depend what they are and how well they do their assigned job.
Audioeng: Indeed, most DAC manufacturers add cost effective USB interfaces which are not always the best! Stand-alone USB inteface make sense for me ONLY if it outputs I2S (not SPDIF !!!) but even fewer I2S inputs vast majority of DAC's have.
I would add only that very high quality stand-alone interface cost a lot. It could be much cheaper if USB output from a music server will be well designed and well executed, if music server designer would asume that USB DAC input is mediocre and do THE RIGHT JOB on the side of music servers. Not super easy but...possible
Of course, not all music servers and not all stand-alone USB interfaces are made equal...this why we do have EARS ;--) Simon
If you want to not only beat, but exceed the performance of the very best CD transports/players, you will need to use USB, and not just any USB. You will also need to use a good computer platform and playback software. It is not rocket-science. Its just like buying a Vinyl or CD system. Separates will always sound better. A preamp and amps will beat an integrated. A transport and DAC will beat a CDP.
Look at the systems that get best of show at CES, RMAF and Newport. Most use USB.
"Can you also mention some other high quality USB converter ? "
Diverter HR Berkeley
"What is the best quality power supply to go with it ?"
Modified Hynes SR3-12
"A USB converter and then the DAC ?"
Yes, plus a good S/PDIF cable. You can get really good one for only $250.
"Also a DAC with high quality USB input and a high quality volume control will be my preference !!! Is there any such thing in the market which will outperform my Sony SCD XA-5400 ES player ?"
Easily, but the separate USB converter on its own power and DAC is still better.
Overdrive SE or Metrum Hex DACs should do the job on their own.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
